find primes in a certain range efficiently - python-3.x
This is code an algorithm I found for Sieve of Eratosthenes for python3. What I want to do is edit it so the I can input a range of bottom and top and then input a list of primes up to the bottom one and it will output a list of primes within that range.
However, I am not quite sure how to do that.
If you can help that would be greatly appreciated.
from math import sqrt
def sieve(end):
if end < 2: return []
#The array doesn't need to include even numbers
lng = ((end//2)-1+end%2)
# Create array and assume all numbers in array are prime
sieve = [True]*(lng+1)
# In the following code, you're going to see some funky
# bit shifting and stuff, this is just transforming i and j
# so that they represent the proper elements in the array.
# The transforming is not optimal, and the number of
# operations involved can be reduced.
# Only go up to square root of the end
for i in range(int(sqrt(end)) >> 1):
# Skip numbers that aren’t marked as prime
if not sieve[i]: continue
# Unmark all multiples of i, starting at i**2
for j in range( (i*(i + 3) << 1) + 3, lng, (i << 1) + 3):
sieve[j] = False
# Don't forget 2!
primes = [2]
# Gather all the primes into a list, leaving out the composite numbers
primes.extend([(i << 1) + 3 for i in range(lng) if sieve[i]])
return primes
I think the following is working:
def extend_erathostene(A, B, prime_up_to_A):
sieve = [ True ]* (B-A)
for p in prime_up_to_A:
# first multiple of p greater than A
m0 = ((A+p-1)/p)*p
for m in range( m0, B, p):
sieve[m-A] = False
limit = int(ceil(sqrt(B)))
for p in range(A,limit+1):
if sieve[p-A]:
for m in range(p*2, B, p):
sieve[m-A] = False
return prime_up_to_A + [ A+c for (c, isprime) in enumerate(sieve) if isprime]
This problem is known as the "segmented sieve of Eratosthenes." Google gives several useful references.
You already have the primes from 2 to end, so you just need to filter the list that is returned.
One way is to run the sieve code with end = top and modify the last line to give you only numbers bigger than bottom:
If the range is small compared with it's magnitude (i.e. top-bottom is small compared with bottom), then you better use a different algorithm:
Start from bottom and iterate over the odd numbers checking whether they are prime. You need an isprime(n) function which just checks whether n is divisible by all the odd numbers from 1 to sqrt(n):
def isprime(n):
i=2
while (i*i<=n):
if n%i==0: return False
i+=1
return True
Related
Number of Different Subsequences GCDs
Number of Different Subsequences GCDs You are given an array nums that consists of positive integers. The GCD of a sequence of numbers is defined as the greatest integer that divides all the numbers in the sequence evenly. For example, the GCD of the sequence [4,6,16] is 2. A subsequence of an array is a sequence that can be formed by removing some elements (possibly none) of the array. For example, [2,5,10] is a subsequence of [1,2,1,2,4,1,5,10]. Return the number of different GCDs among all non-empty subsequences of nums. Example 1: Input: nums = [6,10,3] Output: 5 Explanation: The figure shows all the non-empty subsequences and their GCDs. The different GCDs are 6, 10, 3, 2, and 1. from itertools import permutations import math class Solution: def countDifferentSubsequenceGCDs(self, nums: List[int]) -> int: s = set() g =0 for i in range(1,len(nums)+1): comb = combinations(nums,i) for i in comb: if len(i)==1: u = i[0] s.add(u) else: g = math.gcd(i[0],i[1]) s.add(g) if len(i)>2: for j in range(2,len(i)): g = math.gcd(g,i[j]) s.add(g) g = 0 y = len(s) return y I am getting TLE for this input. Can someone pls help? [5852,6671,170275,141929,2414,99931,179958,56781,110656,190278,7613,138315,58116,114790,129975,144929,61102,90624,60521,177432,57353,199478,120483,75965,5634,109100,145872,168374,26215,48735,164982,189698,77697,31691,194812,87215,189133,186435,131282,110653,133096,175717,49768,79527,74491,154031,130905,132458,103116,154404,9051,125889,63633,194965,105982,108610,174259,45353,96240,143865,184298,176813,193519,98227,22667,115072,174001,133281,28294,42913,136561,103090,97131,128371,192091,7753,123030,11400,80880,184388,161169,155500,151566,103180,169649,44657,44196,131659,59491,3225,52303,141458,143744,60864,106026,134683,90132,151466,92609,120359,70590,172810,143654,159632,191208,1497,100582,194119,134349,33882,135969,147157,53867,111698,14713,126118,95614,149422,145333,52387,132310,108371,127121,93531,108639,90723,416,141159,141587,163445,160551,86806,120101,157249,7334,60190,166559,46455,144378,153213,47392,24013,144449,66924,8509,176453,18469,21820,4376,118751,3817,197695,198073,73715,65421,70423,28702,163789,48395,90289,76097,18224,43902,41845,66904,138250,44079,172139,71543,169923,186540,77200,119198,184190,84411,130153,124197,29935,6196,81791,101334,90006,110342,49294,67744,28512,66443,191406,133724,54812,158768,113156,5458,59081,4684,104154,38395,9261,188439,42003,116830,184709,132726,177780,111848,142791,57829,165354,182204,135424,118187,58510,137337,170003,8048,103521,176922,150955,84213,172969,165400,111752,15411,193319,78278,32948,55610,12437,80318,18541,20040,81360,78088,194994,41474,109098,148096,66155,34182,2224,146989,9940,154819,57041,149496,120810,44963,184556,163306,133399,9811,99083,52536,90946,25959,53940,150309,176726,113496,155035,50888,129067,27375,174577,102253,77614,132149,131020,4509,85288,160466,105468,73755,4743,41148,52653,85916,147677,35427,88892,112523,55845,69871,176805,25273,99414,143558,90139,180122,140072,127009,139598,61510,17124,190177,10591,22199,34870,44485,43661,141089,55829,70258,198998,87094,157342,132616,66924,96498,88828,89204,29862,76341,61654,158331,187462,128135,35481,152033,144487,27336,84077,10260,106588,19188,99676,38622,32773,89365,30066,161268,153986,99101,20094,149627,144252,58646,148365,21429,69921,95655,77478,147967,140063,29968,120002,72662,28241,11994,77526,3246,160872,175745,3814,24035,108406,30174,10492,49263,62819,153825,110367,42473,30293,118203,43879,178492,63287,41667,195037,26958,114060,99164,142325,77077,144235,66430,186545,125046,82434,26249,54425,170932,83209,10387,7147,2755,77477,190444,156388,83952,117925,102569,82125,104479,16506,16828,83192,157666,119501,29193,65553,56412,161955,142322,180405,122925,173496,93278,67918,48031,141978,54484,80563,52224,64588,94494,21331,73607,23440,197470,117415,23722,170921,150565,168681,88837,59619,102362,80422,10762,85785,48972,83031,151784,79380,64448,87644,26463,142666,160273,151778,156229,24129,64251,57713,5341,63901,105323,18961,70272,144496,18591,191148,19695,5640,166562,2600,76238,196800,94160,129306,122903,40418,26460,131447,86008,20214,133503,174391,45415,47073,39208,37104,83830,80118,28018,185946,134836,157783,76937,33109,54196,37141,142998,189433,8326,82856,163455,176213,144953,195608,180774,53854,46703,78362,113414,140901,41392,12730,187387,175055,64828,66215,16886,178803,117099,112767,143988,65594,141919,115186,141050,118833,2849]
I'm going to add "an answer" here because most "not horribly slow" programs I've seen for this are way too elaborate. Call the input xs. The fastest way I know of asks, for each integer j in 1 through max(xs), can j be the gcd of some non-empty subset of xs? Of course if max(xs) can be huge, that can be slow. But in the context you apparently took this from (LeetCode), it cannot be huge. So, given j, how do we know whether some subset's gcd is j? Actually easy! We look at all and only the multiples of j in xs. The gcd of all of those is at least j. If, at any point along the way, their gcd so far is j, we found a subset whose gcd is j. Else the running gcd exceeds j after processing all of j's multiples, so no subset's gcd is j. def numgcds(xs): from math import gcd limit = max(xs) + 1 result = 0 xsset = set(xs) for j in range(1, limit): g = 0 for x in range(j, limit, j): if x in xsset: g = gcd(x, g) if g == j: result += 1 break return result Where L is max(xs), worst-case runtime is O(L * log(L)). Across outer loop iterations, the inner loop goes around (at worst) L times at first, then L/2 times, then L/3, and so on. That sums to L*(1/1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/L). The second factor (the sum of reciprocals) is the L'th "harmonic number", and is approximately the natural logarithm of L. More Gonzo I don't really like having the runtime depend on the largest integer in the input. For example, numgcds([20000000]) takes 20 million iterations of the outer loop to determine that there's only one gcd, and can take appreciable time (about 30 seconds on my box just now). Instead, with more code, we can build some dicts that eliminate all searching. For each divisor d of an integer in xs, d2xs[d] is the list of multiples of d in xs. The keys of d2xs are the only possible gcds we need to check, and a key's associated values are exactly (no searching needed) the multiples of the key in xs. The collection of all possible divisors of all integers in xs can be found by factoring each integer in xs, and generating all possible combinations of its factors' prime powers. This is harder to code, but can run very much faster. numgcds([20000000]) is essentially instant. And it runs about 10 times faster for the largish example you gave. def gendivisors(x): from collections import Counter from itertools import product from math import prod c = Counter(factor(x)) pows = [] for p, k in c.items(): pows.append([p**i for i in range(k+1)]) for t in product(*pows): yield prod(t) def numgcds(xs): from math import gcd from collections import defaultdict d2xs = defaultdict(list) for x in xs: for d in gendivisors(x): d2xs[d].append(x) result = 0 for j, mults in d2xs.items(): g = 0 for x in mults: g = gcd(x, g) if g == j: result += 1 break return result I'm not including code for factor(n) - pick your favorite. The code requires it return an iterable (list, generator iterator, tuple, doesn't matter) of all n's prime factors. Order doesn't matter. As special cases, list(factor(i)) should return [i] for i equal to 0 or 1. For ordinary cases, list(factor(p)) == [p] for a prime p, and, e.g., sorted(factor(20)) == [2, 2, 5]. Worst-case timing is much harder to nail, but the key bit is that a reasonable implementation of factor(n) will have worst-case time O(sqrt(n)).
How do I make my program in python faster
I have a project where I need to find the optimal triplets of number (E, F, G) such that E and F is very close to eachother (the difference is smallest) and G is bigger than E and F. I have to make n numbers of such triplets. The way I tought about it was to sort the given list of numbers then search for the smallest differences then those two will be my E and F after all the n pairs will be done I will search for every pair of E and F a G such that G is bigger than E and F. I know this is the greedy way but my code is very slow, it takes up to 1 minute when the list is like 300k numbers and i have to do 2k triplets. Any idea on how to improve the code? guests is n (the number of triplets) sticks is the list of all the numbers # We sort the list using the inbuilt function sticks.sort() save = guests # Begining to search for the best pairs of E and F efficiency = 0 while save != 0: difference = 1000000 # We asign a big value to difference each time # Searching for the smallest difference between two elements for i in range(0, length - 1): if sticks[i+1] - sticks[i] < difference: temp_E = i temp_F = i + 1 difference = sticks[i+1] - sticks[i] # Saving the two elements in list stick_E and stick_F stick_E.append(sticks[temp_E]) stick_F.append(sticks[temp_F]) # Calculating the efficiency efficiency += ((sticks[temp_F] - sticks[temp_E]) * (sticks[temp_F] - sticks[temp_E])) # Deleting the two elements from the main list sticks.pop(temp_E) sticks.pop(temp_E) length -= 2 save -= 1 # Searching for stick_G for every pair made for i in range(0, len(stick_F)): for j in range(0, length): if stick_F[i] < sticks[j]: stick_G.append(sticks[j]) # Saves the element found sticks.pop(j) # Deletes the element from the main list length -= 1 break > # Output the result to a local file print_to_file(stick_E, stick_F, stick_G, efficiency, output_file) I commented the code the best I could so it would be easier for you to understand.
Construct powerset without complements
Starting from this question I've built this code: import itertools n=4 nodes = set(range(0,n)) ss = set() for i in range(1,n+1): ss = ss.union( set(itertools.combinations(range(0,n), i))) ss2 = set() for s in ss: cs = [] for i in range(0,n): if not(i in s): cs.append(i) cs=tuple(cs) if not(s in ss2) and not(cs in ss2): ss2.add(s) ss = ss2 The code construct all subsets of S={0,1,...,n-1} (i) without complements (example, for n=4, either (1,3) or (0,2) is contained, which one does not matter); (ii) without the empty set, but (iii) with S; the result is in ss. Is there a more compact way to do the job? I do not care if the result is a set/list of sets/lists/tuples. (The result contains 2**(n-1) elements) Additional options: favorite subset or complement that has less elements output sorted by increasing size
When you exclude complements, you actually exclude half of the combinations. So you could imagine generating all combinations and then kick out the last half of them. There you must be sure not to kick out a combination together with its complement, but the way you have them ordered, that will not happen. Further along this idea, you don't even need to generate combinations that have a size that is more than n/2. For even values of n, you would need to halve the list of combinations with size n/2. Here is one way to achieve all that: import itertools n=4 half = n//2 # generate half of the combinations ss = [list(itertools.combinations(range(0,n), i)) for i in range(1, half+1)] # if n is even, kick out half of the last list if n % 2 == 0: ss[-1] = ss[-1][0:len(ss[-1])//2] # flatten ss = [y for x in ss for y in x] print(ss)
I want to minimize the runtime of this Python program
Code that I want to minimize the runtime, it goes through an array of number and finds the max between the current max_product and the next product. def max_pairwise_product(numbers): n = len(numbers) max_product = 0 for i in range(n): for j in range(i+1,n): max_product = max(max_product,numbers[i]*numbers[j]) return max_product if __name__ == '__main__': input_n = int(input()) input_numbers = [int(x) for x in input().split()] print(max_pairwise_product(input_numbers))
Your code is trying to find the maximum product of any two non-identical elements of a numeric array. You are currently doing that by calculating each product. This algorithm has n²/2 calculations and comparisons, while all you actually need to do is much less: We know from basic math that the two largest numbers in the original array will have the largest product. So all you need to do is: Find the two largest integers in the array multiply them. You could do so by sorting the original array or just skimming through the array to find the two largest elements (which is a bit more tricky as it sounds because those two elements could have the same value but may not be the same element) As a side note: In the future, please format your posts so that a reader may actually understand what your code does without going through hoops.
Sorting the numbers and multiplying the last two elements would give better time complexity than O(n^2). Sort - O(nlogn) Multiplication - O(1) def max_pairwise_product(numbers): n = len(numbers) max_product = 0 numbers.sort() if ((numbers[n-1] >0) and (numbers[n-2] >0)): max_product = numbers[n-1]*numbers[n-2] return max_product if __name__ == '__main__': input_n = int(input()) input_numbers = [int(x) for x in input().split()] print(max_pairwise_product(input_numbers))
How can I reduce the time complexity of the given python code?
I have this python program which computes the "Square Free Numbers" of a given number. I'm facing problem regarding the time complexity that is I'm getting the error as "Time Limit Exceeded" in an online compiler. number = int(input()) factors = [] perfectSquares = [] count = 0 total_len = 0 # Find All the Factors of the given number for i in range(1, number): if number%i == 0: factors.append(i) # Find total number of factors total_len = len(factors) for items in factors: for i in range(1,total_len): # Eleminate perfect square numbers if items == i * i: if items == 1: factors.remove(items) count += 1 else: perfectSquares.append(items) factors.remove(items) count += 1 # Eleminate factors that are divisible by the perfect squares for i in factors: for j in perfectSquares: if i%j == 0: count +=1 # Print Total Square Free numbers total_len -= count print(total_len) How can I reduce the time complexity of this program? That is how can I reduce the for loops so the program gets executed with a smaller time complexity?
Algorithmic Techniques for Reducing Time Complexity(TC) of a python code. In order to reduce time complexity of a code, it's very much necessary to reduce the usage of loops whenever and wherever possible. I'll divide your code's logic part into 5 sections and suggest optimization in each one of them. Section 1 - Declaration of Variables and taking input number = int(input()) factors = [] perfectSquares = [] count = 0 total_len = 0 You can easily omit declaration of perfect squares, count and total_length, as they aren't needed, as explained further. This will reduce both Time and Space complexities of your code. Also, you can use Fast IO, in order to speed up INPUTS and OUTPUTS This is done by using 'stdin.readline', and 'stdout.write'. Section 2 - Finding All factors for i in range(1, number): if number%i == 0: factors.append(i) Here, you can use List comprehension technique to create the factor list, due to the fact that List comprehension is faster than looping statements. Also, you can just iterate till square root of the Number, instead of looping till number itself, thereby reducing time complexity exponentially. Above code section guns down to... After applying '1' hack factors = [for i in range(1, number) if number%i == 0] After applying '2' hack - Use from_iterable to store more than 1 value in each iteration in list comprehension factors = list( chain.from_iterable( (i, int(number/i)) for i in range(2, int(number**0.5)+1) if number%i == 0 )) Section 3 - Eliminating Perfect Squares # Find total number of factors total_len = len(factors) for items in factors: for i in range(1,total_len): # Eleminate perfect square numbers if items == i * i: if items == 1: factors.remove(items) count += 1 else: perfectSquares.append(items) factors.remove(items) count += 1 Actually you can completely omit this part, and just add additional condition to the Section 2, namely ... type(i**0.5) != int, to eliminate those numbers which have integer square roots, hence being perfect squares themselves. Implement as follows.... factors = list( chain.from_iterable( (i, int(number/i)) for i in range(2, int(number**0.5)+1) if number%i == 0 and type(i**0.5) != int )) Section 4 - I think this Section isn't needed because Square Free Numbers doesn't have such Restriction Section 5 - Finalizing Count, Printing Count There's absolutely no need of counter, you can just compute length of factors list, and use it as Count. OPTIMISED CODES Way 1 - Little Faster number = int(input()) # Find Factors of the given number factors = [] for i in range(2, int(number**0.5)+1): if number%i == 0 and type(i**0.5) != int: factors.extend([i, int(number/i)]) print([1] + factors) Way 2 - Optimal Programming - Very Fast from itertools import chain from sys import stdin, stdout number = int(stdin.readline()) factors = list( chain.from_iterable( (i, int(number/i)) for i in range(2, int(number**0.5)+1) if number%i == 0 and type(i**0.5) != int )) stdout.write(', '.join(map(str, [1] + factors)))
First of all, you only need to check for i in range(1, number/2):, since number/2 + 1 and greater cannot be factors. Second, you can compute the number of perfect squares that could be factors in sublinear time: squares = [] for i in range(1, math.floor(math.sqrt(number/2))): squares.append(i**2) Third, you can search for factors and when you find one, check that it is not divisible by a square, and only then add it to the list of factors. This approach will save you all the time of your for items in factors nested loop block, as well as the next block. I'm not sure if it will definitely be faster, but it is less wasteful.
I used the code provided in the answer above but it didn't give me the correct answer. This actually computes the square free list of factors of a number. number = int(input()) factors = [ i for i in range(2, int(number/2)+1) if number%i == 0 and int(int(math.sqrt(i))**2)!=i ] print([1] + factors)